Throughout history we have evidenced some religious political movements that force to rule the governments. They proclaim some rights they think they have to rule states e.g. Christian states, Islamic states etc. Since countries are naturally have mixed people of different religions, what is the basis for a religion to claim supremacy and power politically to rule a country?
According to my opinion , A religion should not be a political ideology of a country based on the following reasons .
1) State or a country is an institution which should not have any inclination towards a specific religion ,which is followed by a community within that country while the rest of the people may not belong to the same religion .
2)Many religious people claim that after implementing their particular religion as state religion they will act in accordance to their religious beliefs . They will fully try to protect the rights of minorities but in reality after declaring a religion as state religion ,the state automatically considers the non followers of that religion as second class citizens .
3)State has a job of controlling , monitoring ,developing etc the country towards betterment .It should neither support a religion nor should it oppose any religion .
4) A country should be a secular one where there should not be any discrimination based on faith and religion . A citizen belonging to any religion or belief should have equal rights as the other citizen belonging to any other faith .
But in secular state , Everyone is allowed to follow their religion until they do not harm others .
Dear Karrar,
With much respect I acknowledge your sincere reply. I am 100% agreeing with your comments. The position you have as your comments are, is actually the same to me. I believe the points you have listed are very foundational for any state to practice well human freedom and rights even in religious aspects.
Thank you very much.
While it is true, Emmanuel and Karrar, that religion should not be the basis for ruling a State, the reality of history is that religions do become such a basis. The most glaring contradiction is the Papal State, the Vatican, when Christ said, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar´s and to God what is God´s." Fortunately, the Vatican today is fairly apolitical thanks to its present leader, but in the Renaissance the opposite was the case. One could point to other states-- Islamic States-- where religion has become the basis. So there is no use denying an actual fact of the religiously grounded State. I live in the United States, founded on the principle of the separation of church and state, but there are many reactionaries here today who would love to change that principle in their own ways.
You are right dear Nelson ,except countries like United stated and some of the European countries ,many countries specifically where muslims are in majority are supporting faith based political system .
I live here in Pakistan and here the system is Islamic and similarly in Iran it is also an islamic state .
Dear Nelson and Karrar,
Thanks indeed. Most proponents of the religious based state take their presuppositions from their holy books or beliefs. Since a religion is a matter of individual persuasion; taking a rule of a country through religion, is not a direct oppression of individual's will and right of freedom of belief?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy Of Science
- Reasoning